To:THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE R.S.D.L.P.

To the C.C.

Published:First published in 1931 inLenin Miscellany XVI.

      Sent from Geneva to St. Petersburg.

      Printed from the original.Source:Lenin
	  Collected Works,

      Progress Publishers,[1977],

      Moscow,Volume 43,

      pages165b-167a.Translated:Martin Parker and Bernard IsaacsTranscription\Markup:R. CymbalaPublic Domain:Lenin Internet Archive

      (2005).You may freely copy, distribute,
	display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and
	commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet
	Archive” as your source.•README

DearComrades,

Ihave talked to Ivan Vasilich’s messenger and yesterday sent a
telegram giving my consent. I authorise Ivan Vasilich or Sergei Vasilich to
make the necessary cuts in thePoor,[2]if it is taken away from Petrov. I agree to its being
taken from Petrov, but only on condition that this will not mean a break
with Petrov, or a sheer deception of Petrov on my part, sinceI gave
Petrov permissionto try to arrange this thing. This means it is
necessary
1) at least to compensate Petrov for expenses already incurred (Ivan
Vasilich’s messenger agreed to this);
2) to get Petrov’s consent to submit to the decision of the higher body
(i.e., I permitted Petrov to make a try, while the C.C. decided to hand it
over to Belov—so that Petrov should not have reason to consider me an
unreliable business partner). If Petrov has already succeeded in arranging
things, I would stronglyadvise against taking it away from him, for I do not see how Belov is
better than Petrov;
3) please get in touch with my
				sister[1]on this matter (she can easily be communicated with), since she might have
already made some arrangements in my name.

Asfor Petrov, I shall inform everybody here that
1) the C.C. did not endorse the contract;
2) we are within our rights in negotiating with Petrov on each separate
instance since no monopoly has been established;
3) it is advisable to deal with the C.C. publishers as more advantageous
and closer to the Party.

Thatseems to be all. Write and let me know whether I have understood
you correctly.

Youragreement with Nolin is good, but I am afraid it might be
fictitious. An “editorial committee”=7—4—1=2!! And these two are
burdened with other things!! This is a fiction, not an editorial
committee. Besides, after signing an agreement with Nolin you all give
heaps of work (Radin, Kamenev, Werner, Schmidt, Lyadov, Bazarov,
Fedorovich, etc., etc. —unless Belov has deceived me?) to Belov. What
does this mean? Nolin for the soul and Belov for the body, is that it? If
our meeting does not take place, you will be kind enough to explain to me
thoroughly by letter what is the matter. It is altogether out of the
question for people in the underground or members of the R.S.D.L.P. to
engage in the complex and bothersome business of publishing. That is why
Belov (and Petrov no less than Belov) is getting ahead of us. And I
seriously warn you that that is how it will be, for Belov has enterprising
people who give themselveswhollyto the business, while Nolin’s
“editorial committee” (you can be sure) will not be able to devote even
one-hundredth of its energies tothiswork. We shall keep on
talking, arguing, bargaining, holding meetings (we have been engaged in
this laudable occupation ever since summer,for six months), while
Belov and Petrov will do business. I am not blaming anybody, for it would
be absurd to do that—it is inevitable under the circumstances. This will
change
1) if freedom is won—and then everything will change; or
2) if Pyatnitsky goes about itlikeBelov and Petrov, which he cannot do since he is occupied
with a host of other things.

P.S.ReceivedRabochyNo. 2. I shall write you about the
feuilleton in detail. The author should not have tackled such subjects: the
result is a sort of “sentimental” socialism, which is very
dangerous.[3]

[1]AnnaUlyanova-Yelizarova.—Ed.

[2]Areference to preparations for the publication of a legal edition of
the pamphletTo the Rural Poor(see present edition, Vol. 6,
pp. 361–432).

ThenamesPetrov, BelovandNolinmentioned in the
letter stand, respectively, for the Maria Malykh, Molot, and Znaniye
publishers.

[3]Thefeuilleton, entitled “Letter to Workers. II”, inRabochyNo. 2 was signed “Trety” (Third). The name of the author has not been
established.

Rabochy(The Worker)—an illegal popular Social-Democratic
paper published, in conformity with the decision of the Third Congress of
the Party, by the Central Committee of the R.S.D.L.P. in Moscow in
August–October 1905. The actual editor was A. A.  Bogdanov.